Let’s say someone is doing insight meditation, and one becomes aware of a root to a hindrance through one’s presently active sense of discernment. If one imagines that the root being observed is a red, hot, burning piece of coal, and the breath is like pouring water onto the burning piece of coal that completely puts it out in one’s imagination, will this meditative process effectively put a real end to the root of that hindrance if one simultaneously ties to this imagined imagery one’s belief that it is truly happening?

One is encouraged to seek the truth, but be warned if you ever find it, you will be treated as blasphemous.

If only at times this imagined imagery during one’s meditation of putting out the burning coals of the roots of the hindrances with imagined water actually works, but at other times it does not, does this cancel out this particular meditative practice as being a an illegitimate technique? Or does it merely indicate that one’s belief in its effectiveness is not genuinely applied adequately enough when it fails to deliver the desired results?

One is encouraged to seek the truth, but be warned if you ever find it, you will be treated as blasphemous.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

Because the question that I asked was serious. If you have a personal problem with me, though, why don't you address me personally in a private message. If you have a serious answer or input to the subject matter of this thread, then by all means, please share what you have to say.

It is quite clear when I have made threads that were meant to be humorous, unless of course the reader is just so completely humorless that they are not able to recognize such things.

One is encouraged to seek the truth, but be warned if you ever find it, you will be treated as blasphemous.

Because the question that I asked was serious. If you have a personal problem with me, though, why don't you address me personally in a private message.

The problem is while people have tried to deal with you seriously you clowned around publicly in response to their well-meaning attempts at trying to deal with you seriously, and your signature raises the question - publicly. Once bitten twice shy.

It is quite clear when I have made threads that were meant to be humorous, unless of course the reader is just so completely humorless that they are not able to recognize such things.

That would be just about - if not - all the responders to your previous two threads of clowning around msgs, and you treated them shabbily with your clowning around and this comment of yours does not help. If you are now, in fact, serious, then let us move on, but do take some responsibility for your previous - at best - questionable behavior.

If you have a serious answer or input to the subject matter of this thread, then by all means, please share what you have to say.

You were given a serious answer to your question: Imagined imagery is not vipassana. It is imagined imagery.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

No, I am not enlightened.Yes, I have clowned around.Yes, I thought it was obvious.Do I like YOU, tilt? No, I don't.Do I think that a lot of Buddhists go around acting like stuck up, know it all snobs? Yes, I do.Am I considering not ever wanting to talk to another Buddhist again, because of it. MAYBE! TILT...It HAS come across my mind more than once.I left the Christian faith because I thought that they were too arrogant, but by and large, Buddhism has them beat at it, if you ask me. I haven't run into so many stuck up jerks in my life, to be honest with you.

NOW, do I apprecieate and find a lot of peace and love in Buddha's writings, yes I do, but I'm not so sure that Buddhism is the right place for me, even still. The ball is on your side of the court, buddy.

One is encouraged to seek the truth, but be warned if you ever find it, you will be treated as blasphemous.

flyingOx wrote:What would you like me to say,then, tiltbillings? Let's see:

No, I am not enlightened.Yes, I have clowned around.Yes, I thought it was obvious.Do I like YOU, tilt? No, I don't.Do I think that a lot of Buddhists go around acting like stuck up, know it all snobs? Yes, I do.Am I considering not ever wanting to talk to another Buddhist again, because of it. MAYBE! TILT...It HAS come across my mind more than once.I left the Christian faith because I thought that they were too arrogant, but by and large, Buddhism has them beat at it, if you ask me. I haven't run into so many stuck up jerks in my life, to be honest with you.

NOW, do I apprecieate and find a lot of peace and love in Buddha's writings, yes I do, but I'm not so sure that Buddhism is the right place for me, even still. The ball is on your side of the court, buddy.

You are still blaming others for your bad behavior. If you are going to really get something out of Buddhism, that probably is not the way to do it. That others may act badly is not the point; the point is taking responsibility for your behavior and the consequences of that behavior. That is between you and you. Just don't expect people who have been burned by your behavior not to be wary, especially when rather than an apology one gets from you a self justification rant.

Now, if you are serious about the question, let us move on.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

flyingOx wrote:Let’s say someone is doing insight meditation, and one becomes aware of a root to a hindrance through one’s presently active sense of discernment. If one imagines that the root being observed is a red, hot, burning piece of coal, and the breath is like pouring water onto the burning piece of coal that completely puts it out in one’s imagination, will this meditative process effectively put a real end to the root of that hindrance if one simultaneously ties to this imagined imagery one’s belief that it is truly happening?

No. As Tilt has inferred, imagination is not seeing things as they really are (vipassana).Ben

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

flyingOx wrote:Telling someone that they are psychologically ill because of the way that they believe spiritually is not being helpful.

Neither is lying to pretend to be something your not and continue on with it even when others show concern for you

If you didnt find it helpful when people thought you were ill because you claimed to be enlightened why didnt you just come clean and admit it was a joke instead of carrying on with it?

When I first became successful at producing my own jhana and higher subtle states, I thought that I WAS enlightened. I don't know if I was or not, now. Too many people have made me question it. As far as everything else, I was just joking, and I thought that it was obvious.

One is encouraged to seek the truth, but be warned if you ever find it, you will be treated as blasphemous.

flyingOx wrote:Let’s say someone is doing insight meditation, and one becomes aware of a root to a hindrance through one’s presently active sense of discernment. If one imagines that the root being observed is a red, hot, burning piece of coal, and the breath is like pouring water onto the burning piece of coal that completely puts it out in one’s imagination, will this meditative process effectively put a real end to the root of that hindrance if one simultaneously ties to this imagined imagery one’s belief that it is truly happening?

No. As Tilt has inferred, imagination is not seeing things as they really are (vipassana).Ben

I see. But if one actually DOES see the root of a hindrance, is it not permissable to also imagine them being put out as with water?

One is encouraged to seek the truth, but be warned if you ever find it, you will be treated as blasphemous.

When I first became successful at producing my own jhana and higher subtle states, I thought that I WAS enlightened. I don't know if I was or not, now. Too many people have made me question it. As far as everything else, I was just joking, and I thought that it was obvious.

Not being critical here but offering some friendly advice ok . If you doubt you are enlightened then you are not, reguardless of it you doubt it yourself or if others "make you" doubt

When one is enlightened one is sure, beyond all doubt

as for the rest, perhaps you thought everyone could tell you were joking but I (and i assume others) could not, hence when you later say it was a joke it just seems like you were taking advantage of peoples kindness and being deceitful

Anyway if anyone is a good buddhist there will be no hatred either way, by all means carry on posting here if you wish. My advice though would to just be honest from now on and leave practical jokes aside

metta

He who binds to himself a joyDoes the wingèd life destroy;But he who kisses the joy as it fliesLives in eternity's sunrise.

flyingOx wrote:Let’s say someone is doing insight meditation, and one becomes aware of a root to a hindrance through one’s presently active sense of discernment. If one imagines that the root being observed is a red, hot, burning piece of coal, and the breath is like pouring water onto the burning piece of coal that completely puts it out in one’s imagination, will this meditative process effectively put a real end to the root of that hindrance if one simultaneously ties to this imagined imagery one’s belief that it is truly happening?

No. As Tilt has inferred, imagination is not seeing things as they really are (vipassana).Ben

I see. But if one actually DOES see the root of a hindrance, is it not permissable to also imagine them being put out as with water?

The problem with imagining it is that your using conditioned thought and are just thinking about it not experiencing and seeing it via mindfulness and concentration to get insight

for a basic example, i can think about anatta and imagine various things to conceptualize it but I still dont actually know or see it

metta

He who binds to himself a joyDoes the wingèd life destroy;But he who kisses the joy as it fliesLives in eternity's sunrise.

This is why in the four foundations of mindfulness, in realtion to the body for this example, we dont sit there and think about the body being anicca, anatta and dukkha but actually experience it and see it via strong mindfulness and concentration

The essence is mindfulness (observing, watching) and concentration (focusing etc)

metta

He who binds to himself a joyDoes the wingèd life destroy;But he who kisses the joy as it fliesLives in eternity's sunrise.

After I had reached the higher jhanas and after the point of perceiving but not perceiving, I WAS sure that I was enlightened, AT THAT TIME. The questioning came later.

You and other say things like, "I'm not trying to be judgemental, not to be critical, not to be this or that," but these are just figures of speech. You ARE being critical, and this is also to me dishonesty. I suppose it depends on who is being dishonest or how long that particular Buddhist has been practicing when they get to actually get away with such things.

As far as hatefulness, whether you say that it is merely me misinterpreting it or not, I definitely have sensed hate being sent my way from several people here on Dhamma Wheel. You can call that an imagination if you want to, but I don't really care.

All of you are making a very good case for me to not become a Buddhist, though.

One is encouraged to seek the truth, but be warned if you ever find it, you will be treated as blasphemous.

After I had reached the higher jhanas and after the point of perceiving but not perceiving, I WAS sure that I was enlightened, AT THAT TIME. The questioning came later.

You arent the first to think such things after said exp. and you wont be the last

You and other say things like, "I'm not trying to be judgemental, not to be critical, not to be this or that," but these are just figures of speech. You ARE being critical, and this is also to me dishonesty. I suppose it depends on who is being dishonest or how long that particular Buddhist has been practicing when they get to actually get away with such things.

Of course its a criticism, the phrase "im not being judgemental" etc means that one isnt criticising you in a negative way but for positive reasons, so its positive criticism. Everyone needs this at some point otherwise we are surrounded by Yes Men and know one would actually learn anything, good criticism makes someone grow

As far as hatefulness, whether you say that it is merely me misinterpreting it or not, I definitely have sensed hate being sent my way from several people here on Dhamma Wheel. You can call that an imagination if you want to, but I don't really care.

Just because something looks like its a personal attack etc doesnt mean it is, Enlightened beings in the suttas were sometimes rude to new students. They had no hate or anger in them. Its the intention behind the act that makes it hateful

The apprerance of something posted doesnt always correlate with the intention behind it

The phrase "cruel to be kind" is apt here

You can believe me or not, its up to you, but i dont hate you and none of my previous posts were written with hate or anger as an intention. I cant speak for others but i assume the same

He who binds to himself a joyDoes the wingèd life destroy;But he who kisses the joy as it fliesLives in eternity's sunrise.